Barclays forcing a mortgage borrower out

uptomyeyeballs

My sister has had her mortgage for the last 17 years with Woolwich/Barclays. For the last 3 years she's been renting her house out (with proper consent from them). Anyway, they've now decided that they aren't going to re-grant that consent and have told her that she needs to change to a proper buy-to-let mortgage. No problem, she says. So, she's asked them to give her details of their BTL mortgages that'll fit her needs, but they've told her she doesn't qualify (on earnings!). The house is worth £115k and she only owes about £30k, so £85k equity. So, she's now being forced elsewhere to see if anyone else will oblige. What a poor show for an existing customer!

Anyone else had this happen to them? How did you resolve it?

Prothet_of_Doom

I'm not sure I understand why she needs to get consent a second time.
What are they actually going to do, if she continues to pay the interest on the mortgage she currently has ? Are they going to repossess with the tennant in situe ?

Wh05apk

They have given her 3 years on consent to let, which is fair, Consent to let is only meant as an interim measure until she is in a position to sell/move back into or get a btl mortgage.


Woolwich are strict with income criteria, as she is an "experienced" landlord (lady!) then other lenders are available, but she should speak to a broker as most BTL are only available through brokers.

uptomyeyeballs

Prothet_of_Doom wrote: »

I'm not sure I understand why she needs to get consent a second time.
What are they actually going to do, if she continues to pay the interest on the mortgage she currently has ? Are they going to repossess with the tennant in situe ?

She says they would only consent 12 months at a time. She needed to re-apply every year (which she understood). She applied for this year and they refused. There is a sitting tenant on a 12 month agreement. She has asked what they suggest, but they've just been no help at all, other than to tell her she'll be in breach if she continues.

mrginge

Its hardly woolwich's fault if your sister can't run her business properly.

uptomyeyeballs

mrginge wrote: »

Its hardly woolwich's fault if your sister can't run her business properly.

The circumstances of the request to let hardly made it a 'business', believe me. She just doesn't understand why Barclays are being so unhelpful and want her to go elsewhere after 17 years.

pcgtron

Go to a broker, get a BTL mortgage from elsewhere. Job done.
Don't see the problem myself. Income shouldn't be a problem, it just won't be with Barclays.

getmore4less

renting a house out is a business

Dave_the_Ginger_Cat

getmore4less wrote: »

renting a house out is a business

Agree - it's declarable income to HMRC






Barclays are perfectly within their right to tighten up on this book - it's higher risk than residential. They either price it as such, or advise they no longer offer such a product. the offer of the mortgage was for the term assuming the original circs remained and they have not

ACG

Theyre not being unhelpful - its not their job to tell your sister where to go if they cant help, thats your sisters job.

I really dont understand the issue, find a new lender where she does fit criteria and remortgage to them.

If she cant find a new lender, find a broker to find a new lender - job done. If she does not meet woolwich/barclays criteria she doesnt meet it.

betmunch

Seriously dont see the issue here.

Woolwich dont want her business anymore. Its residential lending with BTL risk, or course they were going to say no sooner or later.

She can move back in, or remortgage away, or sell the place.

She should be easily sorted out, I wouldnt lose any sleep over it